[talk-au] ODBL yet again, but from a pragmatic approach...

Richard Weait richard at weait.com
Sun Jul 11 00:50:48 BST 2010


On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 1:18 AM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com> wrote:
> As people should now be aware there is currently there is an issue,
> not so much with ODBL, but the new Terms and Conditions people have to
> agree to stating that OSM can change to other "free" licenses in
> future without requiring consent,

"without requiring consent"?  I disagree with you.

I presume that you refer to paragraph three of the contributor terms
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms

"3. OSMF agrees to use or sub-license Your Contents as part of a
database and only under the terms of one of the following licenses:
ODbL 1.0 for the database and DbCL 1.0 for the individual contents of
the database; CC-BY-SA 2.0; or another free and open license. Which
other free and open license is chosen by a vote of the OSMF membership
and approved by at least a 2/3 majority vote of active contributors. "

Which states clearly that it requires consent of the OSM foundation
board and of 2/3 majority of current OSM contributors.




More information about the Talk-au mailing list